Work Package 3 - Romania Impact of the crisis on Romanian migrants
Cristina Chert, Patrick Van den Nieuwenhof
Version 5.0, 20161211
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement No 649447 1/41
This report constitutes Deliverable D3.1-A’, for Work Package 3 of the RE-InVEST project.
December 2016 © 2016 – RE-INVEST, Rebuilding an Inclusive, Value-based Europe of Solidarity and Trust through Social Investments – project number 649447 General contact: info@re-invest.eu p.a. RE-InVEST HIVA - Research Institute for Work and Society Parkstraat 47 box 5300, 3000 LEUVEN, Belgium For more information type the e-mail address of the corresponding author Please refer to this publication as follows: Type the bibliographical reference of the publication Information may be quoted provided the source is stated accurately and clearly. This publication is also available via http://www.re-invest.eu/ This publication is part of the RE-InVEST project, this project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement No 649447. The information and views set out in this paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Neither the European Union institutions and bodies nor any person acting on their behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein.
2/41
Contents
Preface.............................................................................................................................................................................5 1. Introduction: stages in Romanian migration ........................................................................................................6 2. Context: the economic crisis in Romania............................................................................................................10 2.1. The economic crisis in Romania (overview 2007-2012) ...........................................................................10 2.2. Anti-crisis and austerity measures in Romania ...........................................................................................11 3. Theoretical and methodological approach..........................................................................................................13 3.1. The Open Network for community development (TON): historical background ..............................13 3.2. The Open Network for community development (TON): contemporary work .................................14 3.3. Methods used for the Re-InVEST Work Package 3 .................................................................................15 3.3.1. Literature review ......................................................................................................................................15 3.3.2. Methodology.............................................................................................................................................15 3.3.3. Focus groups and interviews .................................................................................................................16 4. Selected biographies................................................................................................................................................18 4.1. H. D. (Romanian living in Belgium).............................................................................................................18 4.2. C. R. (BerbeĹ&#x;ti, Romania)...............................................................................................................................20 5. The impact of the crisis on Romanian migrants ................................................................................................24 5.1. Scope of analysis..............................................................................................................................................24 5.2. Decrease in inward remittances as a consequence of the crisis ...............................................................24 5.3. Changing migration patterns due to the crisis ............................................................................................25 5.3.1. Returners...................................................................................................................................................25 5.3.2. Leaving for another country ..................................................................................................................28 5.4. Syndrome Italy or the deterioration of personal capabilities....................................................................30 5.5. Impact of migration on community services ..............................................................................................30 5.6. Impact of migration on family structures....................................................................................................31 5.6.1 Children – social orphans........................................................................................................................31 5.6.2. Orphaned elderly people ........................................................................................................................32 6. Conclusion: towards entangled capabilities ........................................................................................................33 6.1. Entangling capabilities....................................................................................................................................33 6.2. Entangled capabilities promoted by the home country Romania ...........................................................34 6.3. Entangled capabilities promoted by host countries...................................................................................35 6.4. First steps towards social investments .........................................................................................................36 Appendix 1 - Bibliography.........................................................................................................................................37
3/41
List of tables and figures
Table 1 Evolution Romanian population by residence Table 2 Lifting of the restrictions on the free movement of Romanian workers Table 3 Economic indicators before, during and after the economic crisis Table 4 Overview of interviews Berbeşti Table 5 Main nationalities of foreign population in Belgium
Figure 1 Evolution fertility Romania 1950-2020 / Source: UN Population Division Figure 2 Rate of natural increase per 1.000 population Romania / Source: UN Population Division Figure 3 Emigration by % and country / Source: Economica.net Figure 4 Overview Flemish Romanian local groups since 1989 Figure 5 Overview Walloon Romanian local groups since 1989 Figure 6 Structure of Romanian Belgian collaboration Figure 7 Evolution persons with monthly salary Berbeşti Figure 8 Difference % domicile - residence Berbeşti Figure 9 Timeline C.R. Berbeşti Figure 10 Evolution of inward remittances to Romania 2006-2014 Figure 11 Numbers and rates national and non-national immigrants in Romania, 2008-2013 Figure 12 Romanian migration from and to Germany Figure 13 Migration flow Dumitresti 2005-2014 Figure 14 Romanian migration from and to Spain Figure 15 Number of Romanian in Belgium 199-2015 Figure 16 Evolution of leaving Romanian doctors
4/41
Preface This report is prepared in the framework of the Europe H2020 project ‘Rebuilding an inclusive, value based Europe of solidarity and trust through social investments’ (RE-InVEST). The project aims to evaluate the social investment strategy of the European Commission implemented in 2013 in response to the social damage of the financial crisis in 2008. The RE-InVEST consortium assesses the social damage of the crisis from human rights and capability based approaches with an eye to those vulnerable groups affected the most by the crisis in the 12 countries (and 13 regions) covered by the consortium. The analyses are carried out by the local partners, who consist of NGOs and/or researchers.1 The RE-InVEST consortium has jointly developed the PAHRCA-methodology that combines principles of Participatory Action research with Human Rights and Capability Approaches. This qualitative, participatory research does not generate representative results but rather aims at deepening the understanding of the economic, social, cultural and political impacts of the crisis on the lives of vulnerable people by giving them a voice. In comparison to other European countries involved in this project, Romania has some specific characteristics. The shift to a democratic governance at the end of 1989 is still young. The scars of the communist regime are still visible in the landscape such as huge living blocks and declining industries, the so called pearls of communism. Romania didn’t have a tradition of welfare state: structures are missing and the implementation of solidarity based concepts is very sensitive because of the connotation to forced societal involvement during the communist ‘Golden Age’. Social economy for example is still associated with communist cooperatives and civil society brings back memories to the forced volunteering work for the community. Despite a high economic growth, one of the highest in the EU, the country is facing challenges such as a high rate of people at risk of poverty (around 40%), a high degree of absolute poverty (around 10%), a growing number of in work poor (20%) and few job opportunities. In this context the Ceausescu’s New Man became an individual survivor. As a strategy to overcome these difficulties Romanians started to migrate in order to find better living conditions for themselves and others. For a long time the side effects were not taken serious and no coherent policy was developed. Only recently (February 2016), Romanian president Klaus Iohannis stated that: “the Romanian Diaspora is a veritable asset for the country, adding that he would like Romanians to stop leaving the country because of hardships, leaving just because they choose to do so instead. We are often talking about the loss that the Romanians’ departure abroad represents. In a different approach, however, we can also see the opportunity offered by the presence of a strong Diaspora abroad. Well engaged by a careful state, it can become an important asset for the development and modernization of Romania, veritable capital that can be put to good use. The Romanian state has to serve all Romanians alike, from within and without the country”. He added that a new framework, one in which attention toward the Diaspora would become a national priority, will have to be translated into public policies, programs and projects.2 The Romanian national report focuses on: the impact of migration on the Romanian society and the impact of the crisis on Romanian migrants/migration. In the first part a short introduction is giving concerning the various migration waves. The second part deals with the financial crisis of 2008/2009 and how Romania was affected. Before going to the biographies (part 4) and the analysis of the consequence of crisis related problem in contemporary Romanian migration trends (part 5), the report presents the organization and the methodology (part 3). Finally conclusions with references to the capability approach and policy recommendations are formulated. This report would not have been possible without the input of so many people. We would like to express our gratitude to the participants for sharing their 'biographical narrative' with us about their experiences with life in precarious financial circumstances. http://www.re-invest.eu/ http://www.nineoclock.ro/president-iohannis-deplores-diasporas-unwillingness-to-return-proposes-partnership-consultativecouncil-promised-to-diaspora-to-make-first-step-in-fulfilling-its-mission/ 1 2
5/41
1. Introduction: stages in Romanian migration Huge (e)migration and a comparable internal migration can be seen as one of the strategies to overcome personal, social, economic and political needs. Different theories on the reason why people are migrating have been developed.3 A returning conclusion is that migration has a relative big impact on personal and community development, both in a positive as negative way. From an historical point of view Romania was and is a country of emigration. The 2011 resident population decreased by 1.559.333 persons compared to the previous census (2002). This illustrates the declining trend of the last 2 decades. In comparison with 1992 the Romanian resident population decreases with almost 12%.4 The external migration, a low fertility rate and a declining natural growth are the main causes for this trend.
Year
Population
Difference
1948
15872624
1956
17489450
+10.2%
1966
19103163
+9.2%
1977
21559910
+12.9%
1992
22760449
+5.6%
2002
21680974
−4.7%
2005
21623849
−0.3%
2009
21469959
−0.7%
2011
20121641
−6.3%
Table 1 – Evolution Romanian population by residence Source:Romanian Census 2002 and 2011
Evolution fertility Romania 1950-2020 3,5 3 2,87
2,74
2
2,65
2,55 2,26
2,1
2,22
1,45
1,48
1,53
2015 - 2020
1,32
2010 - 2015
1,34
2005 - 2010
1,51
1
2000 - 2005
1,5
1995 - 2000
Children / woman
3,06 2,5
0,5
1990 - 1995
1985 - 1990
1980 - 1985
1975 - 1980
1970 - 1975
1965 - 1970
1960 - 1965
1955 - 1960
1950 - 1955
0
Figure 1 Evolution fertility Romania 1950-2020 / Source: UN Population Division
3 See for example: MATICHESCU, Marius Lupsa, The Romanian migration: development of the phenomenon and the part played by the immigration policies of European countries, In: Revista de cercetare si interventie sociala, 2015, 50, p. 225-238. 4 Based on the national census of 2011: http://www.recensamantromania.ro/
6/41
Rate of natural increase per 1.000 population Romania 20 15
14,8 12,5
11,7
10,6
10
9,5
8,1
6,1
5
5
0
-0 -2
-2,1
-2,2
-3,5
-5
-4,6
2015 - 2020
2010 - 2015
2005 - 2010
2000 - 2005
1995 - 2000
1990 - 1995
1985 - 1990
1980 - 1985
1975 - 1980
1970 - 1975
1965 - 1970
1960 - 1965
1955 - 1960
1950 - 1955
-10
Figure 2 Rate of natural increase per 1.000 population Romania / Source: UN Population Division
Through more than 100 years of Romanian (e)migration different waves and motives can be distinguished. For the report a summarized overview is given. First stage: the pre-1989 migration5 In the beginning of the 20th century a considerable part of the migratory flows was directly or indirectly connected with ethnic minorities. These minorities moved to states to which they had historical ties (mainly Germany and Hungary), both in reaction to general and ethnic-based discrimination in Romania, and because they hoped for a safer and better life in those states. During communist rule (1947-1989), Romanian authorities exercised restrictive exit policies. Despite this, a relatively high amount of permanent, legal emigration took place under the regime. Ethnic minorities (Jews, Germans and Hungarians) were clearly over-represented among the group of people who legally emigrated from Romania during communist rule. Second stage: 1990-1993 Immediately after the fall of the communist regime, passport administration and international travel were liberalized. Although some measures to limit international travel were taken: taxes were imposed on border crossings and those leaving had to prove that they were in possession of a certain amount of money. However, none of these measures drastically reduced the international mobility of Romanian citizens. In the first three years after the fall of communism 170.000 persons legally emigrated from Romania. Again, ethnic minorities where overrepresented especially Germans and Hungarians. The rate of emigration was 3‰. Third stage: 1993-2001 Between 1993 and 1996 Western European countries had a restrictive visa regime for Romanian citizens, whereby westward migration had relative low levels. In this time Hungary, Turkey and Israel were destination countries. At the end of the 1990s, highly qualified, young emigrants obtained long-term, legal residence in various European countries, but mostly in the USA and Canada. Also more and more unskilled or poorly qualified persons from rural areas began seeking (mostly temporary and/or irregular)
5
http://focus-migration.hwwi.de/Romania.2515.0.html?&L=1
7/41
migratory arrangements with large numbers of workers going to Italy and Spain. The rate of emigration between 1996 and 2001 was 7‰. In 2000 965.500 Romanians or 5% of the population is living abroad. Fourth stage: 2002-2007 On the 1st of January 2002 when countries included in the Schengen space removed visa requirements for Romanian citizens, making a valid passport sufficient for entry. The rate of emigration increased to 28‰. In 2005 1.694.500 Romanians or 8.5% of the population is living abroad. Fifth stage: 2007-2011 Since Romania is part of the European Union (2007), free movement of Romanian workers was foreseen. However the national governments of the countries that were already part of the EU could decide whether they wanted to apply restrictions for a maximum transitional period of up to 7 years.6 From the 1st of January 2014 restrictions are lifted in all EU27 member states. Table 2 Lifting of the restrictions on the free movement of Romanian workers Source: EU Commission 2007 2009 2012 Bulgaria Denmark Italy Cyprus Greece Ireland Hungary Czech Republic Portugal Estonia Finland Latvia Lithuania Poland Slovakia Slovenia Sweden
2014 Austria Belgium France Germany Luxemburg Malta Netherlands Spain UK
The movement to West-European destinations has increased because of the improved access to many labour markets, both low and high skilled workers. The transition from a centrally planned economy to an effectively functioning market economy during the past two and a half decades provided another impetus (low employment rate, low wages, poverty) for Romanians to search for employment abroad. In 2010 the World Bank estimated that 2.769.053 Romanians are living abroad or 12% of the population.7 Sixth stage: 2012-… As seen in the former stage, restrictions on Romanian workers were lifted in 2014 in the EU27 member states. In the same period the impact of the crisis on Romania and on migration can be seen. In 2012 the amount of emigrants and immigrants (mostly nationals) from and to Romania and a changing migration flow pattern can be ascertained. In 2013 the World Bank estimated that 3.430.476 Romanians are living abroad or 16% of the population.8
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=466&, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-1_en.htm World Bank, Bilateral Migration Matrix 2010. 8 World Bank, Bilateral Migration Matrix 2013. 6 7
8/41
Conclusions The above mentioned data are referring to permanent migration. Official data on the dynamics of temporary emigration are very limited. Although Romania can be called a country of emigration, it’s certainly not the only European country facing emigration. The Baltic states, Bulgaria, Malta, Portugal and Ireland are in the same position of a high share of emigration.9
Figure 3 Emigration by % and country / Source: Economica.net
The main European countries of destination for Romanian emigrants are: Italy – 46%10 Spain – 34%11 Germany – 7%12 UK – 4% The high share of migration towards Italy and Spain can be explained by economic reasons and inspired linguistically. The search for job opportunities and/or better paid jobs can be clearly seen in the fact that in the age group 20-40 around 25-30% of the population is migrated.13
http://www.economica.net/romania-o-pata-rosie-pe-harta-migratiei-in-europa-3-4-milioane-de-romani-traiesc-oficial-in-altetari_122469.html 10 http://www.istat.it/it/archivio/186978 11 Instituto Nacional de Estadística: Population Figures at 1 July 2015, http://www.ine.es/en/prensa/np948_en.pdf 12 Zensusdatenbank - Ergebnisse des Zensus 2011 13 Census Romania 2002 - 2011 9
9/41
2. Context: the economic crisis in Romania14 2.1. The economic crisis in Romania (overview 2007-2012)
Romania was admitted as a full member of the European Union in 2007. At that time, the country was led by a center-right coalition. Although Romania had been experiencing vigorous economic growth for several years, society was still affected by inequality and poverty. And although the economy had high rates of growth with an average annual increase of 6,8% in 2004–2008, most of that expansion was generated either by investments in non-marketable sectors or by the consumption of durable goods, which were mainly imported. Romania was directly affected by the crisis in the last quarter of 2008, when the evolution of economic indicators took a sudden turn for the worse. Industrial production and domestic consumption accelerated their declining tendency and budget revenues collapsed. Table 3 Economic indicators before, during and after the economic crisis (Source: Eurostat) 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 GDP growth rate in % RO 7.1 6.8 -5.6 -1.0 1.1 2.4 3.0 2.9 EU28 3.1 0.5 -4.4 2.1 1.8 -0.5 0.2 14 General government gross debt: annual data in % of gross domestic product (GDP) RO 12.7 13.2 23.2 29.9 34.2 37.4 38.0 39.9 EU28 57.8 61.0 73.0 78.4 81.0 83.8 85.5 86.8 Unemployment rate in % RO 6.4 5.6 6.5 7.0 7.2 6.8 7.1 6.8 EU28 7.2 7.0 9.0 9.6 9.7 10.5 10.9 10.2 Inflation rate: annual average rate of change in % RO 4.9 7.9 5.6 6.1 5.8 3.4 3.2 1.4 EU28 2.4 3.7 1.0 2.1 3.1 2.6 1.5 0.5 Final consumption aggregates (volumes): % change over previous period RO 9.6 8.7 -7.4 -1.3 1.0 1.5 0.7 EU28 2.1 0.9 -0.6 0.9 0.2 -0.6 0.1 The crisis had a big impact on the labour market. The layoffs in industry, construction and commerce totalled around 315.000 employees at the end of 2009, or over 85% of the total redundancies in the economy. Because of the restrictive definition of unemployment, those registered and having a social benefit, the unemployment rate of +/- 7% seems to be low. The employment rate or persons with a stable 14 The context is based on a literature review of: - BUREAN, Tom; BADESCU, Gabriel, The effects of economic crisis and austerity measures on political culture in Romania, Cluj, 2013, 20 p. - CARITAS EUROPE, Crisis monitoring report 2014. The European crisis and its human cost, a call for fair alternatives and solutions, 2014, 116 p (Romania: p 56- ). - European Semester documents - FLESHER, Alina; CRIVEANU, Radu Catalin, Some consequences of the economic crisis in Romania, In: Annals of the university of Petrosani, Economics, 12, 2, 2012, p. 135-142. - GOSCHIN, Zizi; CONSTANTIN, Daniela-Luminita; DANCIU, Aniela-Raluca, A regional perspective on the impact of he current economic crisis in Romania, In: Romanian economic and business review, 5, 3, p. 204-225. - MARCUTA, Liviu; MARCUTA, Alina; ANGELESCU, Carmen, Effects of the economic crisis on the standard of living in Romania, In: Procedia Economics and Finance, 6, 2013, p 89-95. - POP, Luana, ESPN Thematic report on social investment Romania, 2015, 33 p. - STOICIU, Victoria, Austerity and structural reforms in Romania severe measures, questionable economic results and negative social consequences, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, 2012, 9 p.
10/41
monthly income is not higher than 62%. The share of long-term unemployment is high: 45.3%. It has risen significantly from 2011: 41.9%. Youth unemployment is high: 22.8% in 2012. Furthermore, Romania has a high share of NEETs (young people neither in employment nor in education or training): 16.8% of the population aged 15-24 in 2012). One of the consequences is that purchasing power declined. While at the end of 2008 the net annual average salary in the economy experienced an annual increase of 23%, it has dropped to 7.7% in 2009 and to 1.8% in 2010. This resulted in a decrease of budget revenues, with a direct impact on the social security budget, which experienced a deficit of 2.3% of GDP in 2011. This situation only partially reflects the effects of the economic crisis, due to the problem of a high financial dependency ratio. 2.2. Anti-crisis and austerity measures in Romania
The response of the Romanian government to the economic crisis came late, but the austerity measures were among the most severe in Europe. The main effects of the global financial crisis became evident only in late 2008 and Romania was forced by circumstances to sign a Stand-By Agreement with the IMF in 2009. However, the key austerity measures were enforced only starting in 2010, when the impact of recession had become alarming: high unemployment rates, an uncontrollable budget deficit and a drastic decline in domestic demand. The political promoter of the austerity measures was a center-right government. The policy response to the crisis, consisting of austerity measures and structural reforms, stemmed from a combination of international pressure (from the IMF), the doctrine of the center-right governing coalition and lobbying by some major social and economic stakeholders. The austerity measures (July 2010) focused mainly on public employees and social welfare beneficiaries, while the structural ‘reforms’ encompassed a broad range of areas, from the labour market to social welfare and health care, as well as the privatization of several Romanian companies: • the standard rate of VAT increased from 19% to 24%, even though Romania already had a relatively very high proportion of indirect taxation, • there have been changes to welfare, including cuts to the child-raising allowance, to unemployment benefit and reductions have been made in facilities for pensioners, • a reduction in the public wage bill amounting to 8.7% of GDP in 2010, • a nominal freeze in pensions related to end 2009 levels (except for minimum pensions which could be indexed), • the cut to public wages in 2010 was 25% but this was partially reversed in 2011 when 15% was restored, • cutting 15% off pensions, but this was declared unconstitutional, • increased prices for utilities: gas prices for domestic and non-domestic consumers increased by 5% and 10% and electricity prices increased by 5%, • a Social Assistance Law which consolidated 54 categories of social benefit into 9 groups. Changes enacted by the new consisted in imposing stricter tests for resources, defining the level of welfare benefits based on the social reference indicator instead of the minimum wage as before. 15 Transferring the financial burden to the local government authorities by creating the social security fund, 30% from the state budget and 70% of local budget amounts, resulted in the widening of the gap between the poorer and richer areas of Romania, • a Labour Code was implemented in March 2011 providing for more flexibility in employment relationships, including in fixed term contracts and providing extensions of probationary periods, • a new Social Dialogue Law (Summer 2010) imposed certain legal obstacles on trade unions by introducing stricter criteria for obtaining representativeness, complicating the administrative 15
The reference social indicator in 2011 was 110 euro, the guaranteed minimum income was 140 euro in 2011.
11/41
procedures for registration of new trade unions and eliminating the so-called professional trade unions, which were the only legal possibility for employees to establish a trade union. National collective negotiations and the national collective agreement were also eliminated, • a process of restructuring public sector employment: in 2010 78.700 jobs were terminated, of which 60.610 were government positions, representing 55% of the total government positions eliminated in the EU, • structural reforms also included the health care system. The cost cuts caused 67 hospitals to be shut down in 2011. A draft bill aiming to radically change the health care system was put up for public debate at the beginning of 2012: health care insurance was to be managed by private companies, while the public hospitals were either to be turned into foundations or privatized. The draft bill caused a wave of public disapproval culminating in street protests. As a result, the draft bill was abandoned, but the reform program is still silent present. The austerity measures had negative social consequences, including persistently high unemployment, a low employment rate and a low sense of wellbeing among the population. The growing social tension and dissatisfaction caused by the austerity measures culminated in a wave of protests in January 2012, leading to the resignation of the government and the appointment of a new technocrat cabinet. The technocrat government was dismissed in April 2012, following a motion of no confidence promoted by the opposition. It was replaced by a coalition formed by social democrats, liberals and conservatives, which maintained unchanged the agreement signed with the IMF. After the elections of November 2012 and the appointment of a new social-democrat – liberal - conservative government in December 2012 some social improvement measures have been introduced: • an increase of public sector wages so as to restore them to pre-crisis levels, • a 4% increase in pensions, • measures to reduce payment periods in healthcare to 60 days, • an increase in the minimum wage from 700 lei/month (160 euro) in 2012 to 975 lei/month (+/220 euro) in January 2015, 1050 lei/month (+/- 236 euro) in July 2015 and 1250 lei/month (+/285 euro) in May 2016, • people who are very poor in retirement (living on less than 700 lei/month) can access a program compensating them for 90% of the costs of drugs, • in June 2015, the VAT on food items was cut from 24% to 9%. In January 2016, the general VAT was lowered from 24% to 20% and the tax on dividends will also be reduced. Further tax reductions are planned to take effect in 2017, • the Parliament passed a law in November 2015 to raise public sector wages by 10% for groups that were not yet covered by previously-approved wage increases. After the resignation of the government due to mass protests against generalized corruption linked to the Club Colectiv tragedy (fire accident in a nightclub with 63 deaths and 148 injured persons), an entirely technocrat government was appointed on the 10th November 2015. The new government, in general, implements further the program of the former government. The IMF’s discontent with Romania’s fiscal plans already led the international body not to extend its Stand-By Arrangement (SBA) with Romania after the last SBA expired in September 2015. New parliament elections will be hold in November 2016. After a period of hope when Romania entered the EU in 2007, disappointment grew rapidly due to the financial crisis and the subsequent severe measures. Capabilities came under threat and migration was increasing: a. What are determining factors to (e)migrate? In other words what are push and pull factors? b. Does migration improve the capabilities of people? Fulfilment of expectations? c. What’s the impact on the capabilities of family members, friends and communities confronted with migration? What’s the relation between individual capabilities and those from others? Is the actual stress on labour mobility taking into account the social consequences? d. Did the crisis have an impact Romanian migrants?
12/41
3. Theoretical and methodological approach 3.1. The Open Network for community development (TON): historical background
The Open Network for community development (TON) is a Romanian umbrella organization, which gathers local women, men and youth movements and stimulates the creation of social medical centers, stimulates social economy initiatives and involves citizens in local decisions. To fully understand some methodological choices, it’s necessary to explain the history of the creation of TON. After being elected as general secretary of the Romanian Communist Party in 1965 and consolidating his power by becoming president of the State Council, communist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu planned a large scale destruction of Romanian villages and municipalities. This communist systematization ended a respectful relationship with the countryside and was the largest European destruction in peacetime. By the end of the 80s of the 20th century, together with the rising internal and foreign protests, Adoption Villages Romania was set up in Belgium (Flanders, 1989) to safeguard the destruction of rural communities in Romania. Started as a protest movement and a humanitarian action, the organization evolved towards an equal bottom up collaboration. Because of the different approach in local and regional collaboration between Romania and Belgium, the word Adoption changed into Action in 2005. This resulted also in the creation of a Romanian sister organization The Open Network for community development in April 2012. By the beginning of 1990 around 350 Belgian towns adopted a Romanian village. In the same year on the European level around 4500 towns adopted a Romanian village. The following two figures are giving an impression on how much and where Belgian-Romanian local collaborations were created since 1989. Figure 4 Overview Flemish Romanian local groups since 1989
Figure 5 Overview Walloon Romanian local groups since 1989
Until today around 120 Belgian Romanian are still active, most of them for already 20 or 25 years. Around 2000 a new need came up: how could this collaboration evolve from external funded projects towards community driven projects. The development of bottom-up and inside-out projects became the headline of the last 10-15 years. Slightly the collaboration evolves from a problem driven approach towards an asset based community development. In this context of a changing paradigm in the local and regional Belgian Romanian collaboration The Open Network for community development was created. 13/41
3.2. The Open Network for community development (TON): contemporary work
The scope of TON is to facilitate a sustainable community development by implementing community development projects at the local, regional, national and international level. Specific objectives are: • to actively involve citizens in order to achieve sustainable community development, with and for the people; • to engage community members, locally, regionally, nationally and internationally by means of information and lobbying for resources, trainings, regular dialogue and exchanges, thereby involving the community members in the shaping of European and national policies, as well as in the implementation and monitoring of national legislation; • to act in a democratic, transparent, representative and inclusive way, ensuring transparent consultation processes, information strategies and promotion of best practices in different domains; • to coordinate and collaborate within the undertakings of Romanian-Belgian organizations representing sustainable community development. The main target group of TON are (vulnerable) people in (vulnerable) communities. The work of TON is structured in local and regional groups and around specific topics such as healthcare, youth movement, civil society, trainings…. TON is in some respect a mirror organization of Action Villages Romania (ADR-Flanders).
Figure 6 Structure of Romanian Belgian collaboration
TON as an umbrella organization became the engine for the further development of the civil society in Romania in a spirit of collaboration with Belgian partners. In this context quite a lot of local groups
14/41
involved in TON are facing a migration trend in their community. Because of the many faces of migration, TON has chosen to focus on migration in Work Package 3 of the Re-InVEST project. 3.3. Methods used for the Re-InVEST Work Package 3
3.3.1. Literature review
In the first stage of the implementation of Work Package 3 a literature review was conducted. Specific attention was given to articles and publication about Romanian emigrants, the impact of the crisis on migration and returning Romanian migrants. An extensive bibliography can be found in Appendix 1.
3.3.2. Methodology
RE-InVEST aims to provide a philosophical, institutional and empirical foundation on the Social Investment Package, in order to enhance a more solidary, inclusive and trustful Europe. To reach this goal the theoretical and methodological approach proposed is through the intersection of capability and human rights approaches based on participatory action research. The Capability Approach (CA) developed by Amartya Sen (1999) brought a new framework towards economic development by focus his analysis in what people are able to be (or to do) to achieve their wellbeing or quality of life beyond income factors. So the core issue for Sen is not only what individuals choose, but the choices that they would make if they had the abilities/freedom to lead their lives the way they want to. Examples of capabilities can be: to be able to hold a decent job and not any job but a decent job; to be able to have leisure activities; to learn valuable things and be able to have education and be free of any kind of violence. So, quality of life doesn’t depend only on income. Income is one of many variables, like trust in democracy, the political institutions, in civil society, in the neighbourhood, in the household. In addition, CA has an intrinsic value quite different from the practical approach more concerned with the economic growth, GDP, which potentially generates decent jobs. Speaking about human dignity and about what people consider they need and should have it is very important to diagnosis social impacts on vulnerable people: “What am I able to do and be?” The Capability Approach as developed by Sen (1999) and Nussbaum (2011) defines the person´s wellbeing in terms of beings and doings (achievements/functionings) a person achieves and her/his capability to choose among different combinations of such functionings. By functionings may be considered the basic needs as having shelter; health care; education or more complex features such as self-respect and wellbeing. To live a life that persons want to lead and have reason to value, the resources and conversation factors are central components. In other words, the perception that the individual has of quality of life depends not only of his personality or features like age or gender but also of the resources available and the cultural values of the society where he/she is living in. So, resources can be defined as material conditions such as income, goods and services, which have an instrumental value and are the means needed to reach functionings. Convert factors help to converting resources into doing and wellbeing. There are a range of conversion factors: personal, social and environmental that can constrain or enable people’s capabilities. Personal conversion factors are such as skills and body features; social conversion factors are like social norms, laws, customs and traditions and social institutions and policies; finally environmental conversation factors are such as climate and geography. The achieved functionings are the way people live to be free to be able to choose things to value in life e.g. to be able to choose a decent job.
15/41
Capabilities and human rights are directly linked by describing the core values of well-being and a good life. Besides human rights have been developed through important historical periods, the 20th century established key international human rights instruments namely: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) adopted by the United Nations in 1948 which states in Article 25 that “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and the necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of live hood in circumstances beyond his control”. In the international and national legal framework of UDHR, the states are obliged to ensure the effective exercise of the right to protection against poverty and social exclusion. As it is pointed out in the Council of Europe Revised European Social Charter, Article 30, the States must take measures “to promote the effective access of persons who live or risk living in a situation of social exclusion or poverty, as well as their families, to, in particular, employment, housing, training, education, culture and social and medical assistance”. Human rights are inalienable rights and fundamental entitlements by a human being as prepolitical status prior membership to a state. The Human Rights approach includes a universal and holistic perspective of the human being in terms of civil and political rights and the social and economic rights. They set up the standard of living conditions and the deprivation of needs can be as a denial of rights. In this context the Human rights discourse can emancipate and transform through collective action and participation of who is excluded by their own rights. The Merging of Knowledge (MOK) approach involves a collective of mixed groups of researchers the coconstruction of knowledge about poverty and social exclusion by discussion and reflection: people who experience poverty and social exclusion in first hand to talk about their needs and their resilience. To bring a more complete and broader knowledge it is crucial to have their participation and their own voice as co-constructors of Knowledge. Academics and scholars should assume the role to them to “Explain to us rather, Help us to think”. This process helps to raise awareness about their situation of rights denial and implies to the solution of the problem and policy recommendations. The knowledge of social workers who work with vulnerable people is a core part of the MOK perspective. RE-InVEST research approach is a Participatory Action Human Rights and Capability Approach (PAHRCA) developed in seven steps): 1. Identify and meet partner NGO/gatekeeper, 2. Preliminary ‘meet ups’ (for trust building if necessary), 3. First meeting with participants – trust building, 4. Developmental: implement developmental human rights & capability approach, 5. Inquiry/data gathering, 6. Identifying patterns (key issues and themes of concern to the group) and 7. Undertake action/outcome using one or a combination of approaches.
3.3.3. Focus groups and interviews
In the TON network two communities with a strong migrating history and population were chosen, namely Dumitresti (village) and Berbeşti (city). In addition some smaller testimonies are integrated. People from local authorities and civil society were involved in the focus groups. Main purpose was to map the impact of the economic crisis on the community and migrants. Based on these focus groups persons were selected for an in-depth interview. Because of migration of Romanians from Spain to Northern countries, an interview was done with a Romanian worker who migrated from Spain to Belgium. For Dumitresti 10 returning migrants were selected to do a snake in which they drawn their personal life story since the crisis. The time of migration was 2007-2012 and the countries of destination were Greece and Italy.
16/41
For Berbeşti an in depth qualitative analysis was conducted during a week of field research in April 2016. In total 26 persons were interviewed. To structure the interview, people could draw their own personal timeline starting from 2006. The evolution of how they perceived their personal life is presented in the following table. Parts of the interviews will be used to illustrate some societal trends. Whereas the point of view in Dumitresti was focused on returners, in Berbeşti a more mixed group was selected with a focus on their opinion about migration. Table 4 Overview of interviews Berbeşti Name AMZULOIU Simona CATRINA Marius CEBOTARI Liliana CHELCEA Mariana Nadia CUMPANASOIU Milorad Ioan DAL POS Luigino DINCA Melania Ramona DINICA Mihaela GIOGA Dumitru GULICA Florea GULICA Silviu MATEESCU Adina MATEESCU Lucia MATEIESCU Alexandru MATEIESCU Sebastian MUTU Iuliana PARAUSANU Rodica PETRESCU Adrian PETRESCU Ana-Maria RADUCAN Mirel RUSIE Constantin RUSIE Mihaela STANICA AnaMaria ZAMFIROIU Adina ZAMFIROIU Cristina ZAMFIROIU Silvia
Migration Gender Age abroad
Relatives abroad < 2008
F
No
Yes
Satisfactory Good
Very good
200 NA
Bank Manager Deputy director school Teacher English
M
41 No
Yes
Good
Good
Very good
175
F
40 Yes
No
Good
Satisfactory Good
Jurist Town Hall
F
36 No
NA
Very good
Bad
Manager Mine
M
48 No
NA
Satisfactory Bad
Very good
NA
NA
Company manager
M
72 Yes
Yes
Satisfactory Good
Bad
NA
NA
PR Town Hall Teacher French Vice Mayor Forest Engineer Consular Identity Cards
F F M M M
39 No Yes 65 No 56 No 35 No
NA Yes No Yes Yes
Very bad Very good Bad Good Very good
Very bad Satisfactory Very bad Good Very bad
Bad 300 220 Very good 300 480 Satisfactory NA NA Bad 1300 550 Very good 300 500
Teacher primary school F
38 Yes
No
Bad
Very bad
Satisfactory
220
500
Doctor Public Achisitions inspector University assistant PhD Unemployed
F
60 No
No
Satisfactory Bad
Bad
800
400
M
29 NA
NA
Satisfactory Bad
Satisfactory
300
200
M F
32 Yes 28 Yes
No Yes
Good Very bad
Good Good
Very good Good
Unemployed
F
47 No
No
Good
Bad
Ambulance driver
M
30 No
No
Bank Officer
F
28 No
Team Chef Mine
M
Unemployed Referent Identity Cards Teacher French Personal Assistant Mayor Inspector Identity Cards Nurse
Profession Teacher Geography/History
2008-2012
Salary Euro < 2008 2015
2015
NA
Very bad
800 NA
300
NA
250
NA 300
0
Very bad
220
100
Satisfactory Good
Good
150
200
No
Satisfactory Good
Very good
0
210
45 No
Yes
Bad
Satisfactory Very good
600
900
M F
39 Yes 38 NA
Yes NA
Bad Very bad
Very bad Very bad
150
NA 220
F
Yes
Yes
F
26 Yes
F F
Very bad Bad
NA
Satisfactory Very good
Good
NA
Yes
Bad
Very good
30 No
No
Satisfactory Good
Satisfactory NA
60 No
No
Good
Good
Very bad
Bad
NA 220
250 220
17/41
220
400
4. Selected biographies 4.1. H. D. (Romanian living in Belgium)
February 13 2016 – H. D. is welcoming me with open arms in his house in As (province of Limburg in Belgium). A man 41 years old, married and 1 child. At the time of the interview H. D. is working for a car service company and on the first sight everything seems to go well. H. D. also doubted a bit to tell his story because “it’s not that spectacular”. But once he starts to tell his life journey, the ‘normal’ situation is putted in a completely new light. A story of vulnerability, permanent insecurity and struggling to survive starts more the 25 years ago. H. D. was growing up in a small village, named Zagra, in the county of Bistrita-Nasaud in the Northern part of Romania. Zagra is composed of five villages: Alunişul, Perişor, Poienile Zagrei, Suplai and Zagra. At the time of his birth the village counted 4.504 inhabitants.16 The communist period (1974-1989) During his childhood the communists were ruling the country: “When looking back to this period I have a double feeling. At that time, being the only child in the household, my parents had a job as teacher and had a medium salary. In that time we had our own garden for vegetables and fruits and we were growing some small animals such as chickens. So we were not really depending on what was available in the shops. Certainly during the last years of communism the shops were empty and we had to wait in the line when products arrived. Although there was no freedom of expression, we had a rather decent life and I had the opportunity to go to school. I know this sounds like a contradiction: in that time there was money in our state controlled CEC bank account but there were no products to buy. By the way today in Romania it seems to be the opposite: no money on the account and too much products that are on the market. On the other hand the communists were also controlling this area with an iron hand, while our village Zagra was safeguarded of collectivization and forced cooperative work, people had to pay high amounts of agriculture taxes to the regime. This leaded to a pauperizing of the population and youngsters took the decision to go to work in the nearby industrialized city Bistrita. Again this has a double side: there was a 100% employment, but in quite a lot of cases also forced labour and not adapted to the competences of people. In the mid of the 1980’s when I started to become an adolescent, you could see and feel that societal problems were growing.”. In the 1980s the economy collapsed completely and a dark period started for the Romanian population, a period that was also known as the 3 f's period: Frica - anxiety, Foame - hunger, Frig - cold. As an answer to the food shortages Ceausescu initiated a ‘Rational Eating Program’, being a ‘scientific plan’ for limiting the calorie intake for the Romanians, claiming that the Romanians were eating too much. It tried to reduce the calorie intake by 9-15 percent.17 Also other measures were taken. In December 1982, a reform of the salaries system was implemented: part of the wages were to be paid to the workers only if the company achieved its goals. The goals were often not achieved, so de facto this meant a decrease of the wages. The electricity and district heating were often stopped in order to save energy, leading to unbearable winters. Availability of hot water was also restricted to one day per week in most apartments. At the end of the 1980’s East European countries such as Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria transformed from a closed communist dictatorship towards a more open democratic society. Romania under the leadership of Ceausescu seemed to become the exception in this wave of societal changes. However, this turned out to be just a façade. Several demonstrations (1983, 1986 and 1987) were coming to an accumulation point in 16 17
http://enciclopediaromaniei.ro/wiki/Comuna_Zagra#Demografie http://www.istorie-pe-scurt.ro/cum-arata-o-cartela-pe-vremea-lui-ceausescu-programul-de-alimentatie-rationala/
18/41
December 1989. During the Christmas days of 1989, Ceausescu was captured and executed. According to H. D.: “These days, I still remember them, were a period of hope: finally we could express ourselves without being afraid to end up in jail. And the world was opening for Romania. But very soon after the ‘Revolution’ this hope turned into a disbelief. Political arrangements, corruption at all levels, layoffs of industries, unemployment… were dominating the discussions among people on the street.” Post Romanian Revolution Period (1990-1999) After the Romanian revolution in 1989, reorganization were implemented because of financial and efficiency reasons. The industrial decline which characterized Romania after 1990 has affected an important number of cities in the region, especially the ones which have relied on a single industrial activity. As a consequence ‘old’ industries were shut down or are on the way to be closed. H. D.: At that time my father was in the running to become the school director, but he didn’t had the job because others were paying for the function. Even without any qualification, but with enough money you could become whatever you wanted to become. In this period I was also struggling with my own identity: what I’m going to do and how can I do something good for my country. I decided to start with Law Studies at the university in Cluj. After a while I wanted to be more in the decision making center and moved to the capital Bucharest, where I lost one year of studies because the University of Bucharest did not accredited my studies in Cluj. To have an impact in society I took a job as a journalist for the newspaper Republica. Although, because of this function, I had some come contacts with politicians, I realized that nothing could be done without money and bribes. This caused stress and I started to have health problems (psoriasis). So I moved again to Cluj and the same story restarted: we can not accredit your studies from Bucharest. I was sick of it and this was decisive moment in my life. Migration to Spain (1999-2008) In 1999 a click came up in my head and decided to leave the country. I was remembering an exchange with a school from France and still had the address of one of the boys from that school. My plan was to search him and try to stay at his place in Bessan. It was not going to be an easy way, because I was already in love with my future wife M. and had to leave her. The first obstacle was to find a way to go out of the country. I found a friend who knew a truck driver who was doing international transport to the UK. Our meeting point was Alba Iulia and from there the journey started. It was a risk for both of us, because I was not having papers to leave the country. So when we had control I had to say that I was the second driver, although I didn’t have a driving license. As a miracle at the border with Hungary they were not asking for papers and let us drive. In Hungary our ways separated: the driver to the UK and I to France by train with only 50 dollars in my pocket. After several days I reached the house in France. An unpleasant surprise was waiting there: the father of the boy was telling that his son was in hospital due to a drugs addiction and God knows the father was blaming me for this. So I was not welcome at all. I spent the night on the street, looking for parking places where I hoped to find a Romanian truck driver. And indeed I found, he told me that he could bring to Cordoba in Spain. He told me that also other Romanians were there. This was the only thing he could and wanted to do for me. When I arrived in Cordoba and having some telephone numbers of Romanians, I could reach one person who wanted to help me. From Cordoba I travelled to Motril. There I could stay in an apartment. But this situation was only temporary, because I didn’t have any money for food, clothes…. As a gift from heaven: one day when I was walking in the street somebody shouted my name. It was a guy from the same region where I lived in Romania and he followed courses in my mothers’ class. After this meeting everything was going fast: he helped me to find a job in picking tomatoes. For more than two years I worked in a gray situation: working on the black market, not always paid correctly, more police controls, no social security. But I didn’t want to go back to Romania. In 2002 everything changed: visa requirements were lifted and we could travel more freely. I had the opportunity to regularize my papers and my girlfriend could come over to Spain. From that point on we were able to work on a legal way and could
19/41
save a bit of money to start with our own small business in tomatoes. This situation wouldn’t last long, because the first signs of crisis in Spain appeared already in 2006. At that time I also started to struggle with my health. Unemployment and less money that could be spend. So we were obliged to layoff our business and to find another solution. The Belgian period (2008- …) We decided to go to Belgium, because the sister of my wife married a Belgian man and moved to Belgium. So we were very lucky that this man wanted to help us in Belgium. In 2008 we could move to Belgium. It wasn’t easy because we had to adapt again to a new environment and experienced some language problems. But I found a job as a seasonal worker in agriculture. After this I found a more stable job in a construction company. After postponing year after year, because of financial reasons, we decided to marry and a daughter has born. But soon after this memorable moment, the crisis reached Belgium. The construction company went in bankruptcy. After that I found a job in logistics: he had to work with products in a freezer of -20°C. Ok I said to myself: I could work in more than 40°C in Spain, I can handle also -20°C. After 1 year the company owners announced to reorganize and to relocate their activities to Poland, because of the lower salaries there. In 8 years I lost 5 jobs in Belgium and was again without work. But at the same time it was strange: although I didn’t had a job my personal and family was going step by step better. I think this is not possible in Romania. Now I’m working for a big car company in logistics. This are going better now. I could make some friends and now I don’t feel the necessity to go back to Romania, although I miss my relatives. Who knows what the future will bring?”. During the time H. D. was staying abroad, the population of his home village Zagra was declining from 4504 inhabitants in 1977 to 4254 in 1992, 3767 in 2002 and 3527 in 2011. A lower birth rate and emigration are the causes of this decrease in population.
4.2. C. R. (Berbeşti, Romania)
Berbeşti is a town located in Vâlcea County, Romania, about 78 km south-west from Râmnicu Vâlcea, the county capital. The town administers five villages: Berbeşti, Dămţeni, Dealu Aluniş, Roşioara, Târgu Gânguleşti and Valea Mare. During the communist time, investments were done in the heavy industries. This resulted in the creation of mono-industrial centers. The Oltenia region was characterized by investments in coal industry. The year 1956 corresponds to the opening of the first coal mines in the mining basin of Oltenia (Berbeşti mine: 1978). Instead of tractors and threshing machines in that area emerged huge earth-moving rotary conveyors of all kinds which brought dislodged coal at points of loading coal into railroad cars. The mining development strategy promoted in Romania before 1990 was based on the concept of economic self-support in providing the necessary mineral raw materials. Because mining wages in this branch were relatively high and enjoyed a number of social facilities (especially in providing housing) in coalfields areal a heterogeneous workforce was transferred coming from across the whole country. Workers from the Moldova region moved to the region of Oltenia. Thus, the situation came to the existence of a mining sector more developed than would be allowed under normal mineral reserves potential of the country and economically unjustified as well. In 1989, the Romanian mining branch reached its maximum development when 278 underground pit-mines and quarries were running and 350.000 people were employed directly and another 700.000 people were employed indirectly in mining industry. After the Romanian revolution in 1989, reorganization were implemented because of financial and efficiency reasons. The industrial decline which characterized Romania after 1990 has affected an important number of cities in the region, especially the ones which have relied on a single industrial 20/41
activity. As a consequence ‘old’ industries were shut down or are on the way to be closed. This leads also to the closing of mine suppliers companies.18 Due to the dependency on this single industry a huge unemployment appeared. The mine of Berbeşti underwent a huge transformation in 1996: reorganization and job losses, which can be clearly seen in the decrease of persons with a monthly salary in Berbeşti19.
Figure 7 Evolution persons with monthly salary Berbeşti
The lack of jobs and no perspective for a better future resulted in an internal and external migration. In 2011 1005 persons do have a domicile in Berbeşti, but are living elsewhere.20 This group represents almost 1/5 of the population with a domicile in Berbeşti. In 2002 this was only 6%. This number of 1005 can be further refined by category: around 500 persons are living and working permanently outside the country, around 100 persons are working outside the country by a season based contract and the remaining group lives elsewhere in Romania.21 The difference between domicile and residence is clearly found in some age categories. The biggest group not present is the young active population.22 Difference % domicile - residence Berbesti 2011 20
10
0 Total
<5
5-9
10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 >85
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50 % difference
Figure 8 Difference % domicile - residence Berbeşti
BULEARCA, Marius; POPESCU, Catalin, Gas and coal extractive industry during the socialist industrialization period (19481989), In: Annals of the „Constantin Brâncuşi” University of Târgu Jiu, Economy Series, Special Issue ECO-TREND 2015 – Performance, Competitiveness, Creativity, 9. 394-398. 19 Tempo Online: FOM104D - Numarul mediu al salariatilor pe judete si localitati 20 Tempo-Online: POP107D - POPULATIA DUPA DOMICILIU la 1 ianuarie pe grupe de varsta, sexe, judete si localitati 21 Numbers provided by the Mayor of Berbesti, April 1 2016 22 Tempo-Online: FOM104D - Numarul mediu al salariatilor pe judete si localitati 18
21/41
To illustrate the inability to keep Berbeşti attractive for their citizens, the Mayor says in an interview (April 1 2016): “My son opened a business in Finland some years, this year I already helped 50 persons from Berbeşti to go to work there”. The precarious situation is not seen as a sum of individual vulnerabilities but more as a community in regression. In the context of this work package, a one week field research was done in Berbeşti. In total 26 people were interviewed and visits were conducted. The interviewed persons were asked to draw their personal development timeline since 2006. In a separate report the results are presented. 1996, the year of huge reorganizations in the mine, is also the year where the life story of C. R. start. His timeline and his perception of his personal development are constantly on the negative side and declining permanently. Figure 9 Timeline C.R. Berbeşti
C. R. (Interview April 2 2016) born in 1977 and living for 20 years in Berbeşti: “Because I lost my job in 1996, I was looking for new possibilities. These I couldn’t find in Berbeşti or in the region because of the restructuring of the total mine industry. In that time we heard that Greece was in a deep need for low skilled labour. More specifically, workers are needed in constructions, in agriculture for collecting olives and oranges, as well as in restaurants. In other words, it needed low skilled people. In 1996 I left Berbeşti together with a group from our region, not exactly knowing what would come but with a hope for a better future. Some parts of the way to Greece we did by feet others by train or car. We went by train through the former Yugoslavia to Macedonia (FYROM). We got off the train 5 or 6 stops before the customs point. It was quite far from the border, the closer one got to it, the more frequent the control was. We crossed the border in Macedonia and then we took a taxi to the Greek borderline. The taxi drivers were very nice and they showed us how to go from there. we got here illegally. It was me who came first, then my wife in 1999. After a bit more than one week I arrived to my destination, a small village near Thessaloniki.”. immigrants who came to Greece before 1998 legitimized their stay owing to the presidential decrees of 1997 which inaugurated the first regularization program, or within the framework of the second regularization program, under law 2910/2001. It appears that the initiative of ‘doing their papers’ belonged to the immigrants and that there were instances in which the employed immigrants were supported by their employers with the necessary procedures. This was for C. R. certainly not the case during the first years of his stay in Greece: “We were perceived as slaves. We had to work in the orange garden without contract and not being sure that we were getting paid. The owner instead of paying for our work was putting the police on us as if we were thieves. Living in a house without a decent roof and the risk to be captured by the police was our life during the first 2 years. In 1998 things started to change, finally I could start working for a good manager, he protected us from the police but still we had to work without papers. One year later my wife was coming to Greece. Our living conditions didn’t improved: living with 25 persons in the same house, daily work agreements and depending on seasonal work. Only in 2002 we arranged our papers, but the man who was helping with the papers was asking to work for him for free as
22/41
a compensation for his help. Almost in the same period Greece banks were offering credits. It was very easy to get a loan, because the only thing needed was an identity card. We took a loan in order to buy a small house. In 2006 my wife got pregnant and in 2007 our son R. was born. During this period my wife couldn’t work officially and took some bad paid jobs as cleaner or housekeeper. All of this on the black market, so she was working without papers. And the child allowance was only 80 euro a year. On top of this the crisis affected Greece very hard: loss of jobs, more hours for less money…. During these times our problems started to pay back the loan to the bank. After doing some smaller jobs, we decided to go back to Romania in 2013. But also here troubles were growing in Romania: we experienced difficulties to reintegrate in our ‘own’ home place. Certainly our son has difficulties in the school to be accepted by other children. By the end of 2015 I was engaged by Govora, the mine company, but they paid only on an irregular base my salary. So I couldn’t keep this job. And still our loan needs to be paid back in Greece. We don’t see many possibilities anymore for the future: our son needs to go to school and our grandmother is very ill and needs personal assistance. But we don’t have resources to help our own family.”. The day after our interview (April 3 2016) the couple left Romania again for Greece to find a solution for their financial duties in Greece, leaving their son and their grandmother behind not exactly knowing when they can return to Romania.
23/41
5. The impact of the crisis on Romanian migrants 5.1. Scope of analysis
It is found that on the short term emigration had a positive impact in the Romanian economy: emigration has decreased the pressure on the labour market, alleviated poverty through money remittances and has determined wage increases for those left behind. Nevertheless the negative societal consequences can and may not be denied: the pressure on family and community structures, brain drain, ageing of the population and problems related to migration in host countries. The financial crisis of 2008-2009 has enlarged the negative impacts and reduced some of the positive effects. These consequences are described more extensively below and are structured around topics: • The impact of the crisis on Romanian migrants and migration patterns. • The impact of the Romanian crisis measures on migration • The social effects of migration in the home country • Migration policies: a sufficient answer to societal challenges?
5.2. Decrease in inward remittances as a consequence of the crisis
One of the motives to go to work abroad is the ability to earn more money than in the home country in order to save and send money home. Due to the crisis job availability and security have declined in a lot of destination countries: job loss, reduced working hours and/or financial cuts in earnings. As a consequence financial remittances started to decline from 2008.
Figure 10 Evolution of inward remittances to Romania 2006-2014 Source: World Bank, Factbook 2016: Countries M-Z, p. 43.
The total amount of money transferred to the home country decreased with almost 65% since 2008. The lower availability of financial resources both in the home country and in the host country, also caused other negative consequences: • the number of visits in the home country has continuously declined because of lack of money and the fear to lose the job while in Romania • difficulties of (grand)parents to provide basic necessities for their (grand)children • difficulties to keep in contact with relatives due to rise in phone and internet costs • in some cases relatives in Romania need to send money to relatives working/living abroad
24/41
5.3. Changing migration patterns due to the crisis
The crisis caused many immigrants of the past decade to leave certain host countries again. What is interesting here is that the emigration flows consisted largely of migrants moving elsewhere or foreign nationals returning. 5.3.1. Returners
The returning phenomenon can be seen in the relative share of national immigrants in Romania. Romania with a share of more than 90% national immigrants, is at the first place in Europe followed by Lithuania (88 %), Latvia (72 %), Portugal (64 %), Poland (63 %) and Estonia (58 %).
Figure 11 Numbers and rates national and non-national immigrants in Romania, 2008-2013 Source: Eurostat, migr_imm2ctz
The growing returning trend can also be seen in Germany. Figures show a rising number of people moving back from Germany to Romania.23 Figure 12 Romanian migration from and to Germany / Source: thelocal.de
DumitreĹ&#x;ti, a commune located in Vrancea County, is composed of sixteen villages. Between 2002 and 2012 the population decreased from 5278 to 4602 inhabitants (-13%). This decline is comparable to the national trend. Dumitresti is experiencing a leave and return migration. In the years before the accession of Romania to the EU (2007), a relative small negative migration can be seen in Dumitresti.24 This external migration grew the first years after the EU, but slowed down in the years after the crisis. 23
http://www.thelocal.de/20140224/thousands-bulgarians-and-romanias-leave-germany-each-month
24
Tempo Online: POP307A - Stabiliri cu domiciliul (inclusiv migratia externa) pe judete si localitati and POP308A Plecari cu domiciliul (inclusiv migratia externa) pe judete si localitati 25/41
Figure 13 Migration flow Dumitresti 2005-2014 / Source: INSSE, Temponline
During 3 focus group meetings in Dumitresti, 10 people with a migration background were brought together to draw their snake timeline and based on this 3 persons were selected to tell their migration story and why they choose to return to Dumitresti. B. E. (43 years, woman). B.E. is coming from a neighbourhood community of Dumitresti (Vintileasca), she is married in Dumitresti and she established her household here. Because she was not having a working place in Romania, she and her husband decided to leave Romania and to go to Italy. In 2008 they were in Italy and she finds a job as a small administrator in a bread factory. In 2009 she find a job into a printing business in Valvo-Sacco but in 2010 she is coming back to Romania because she is having a baby and she decided to take care of her baby. Because the financial needs are causing problems, she decided to find a job. Because she could not find a job, she decided to continue her studies and could finish a post school in the medical-pharmaceutical field; she is doing also courses for baby-sitter; communication expert assistant and public relations. Even if she was doing so many official qualifications she cannot find a place to work in Dumitresti and she cannot go to work into the nearest big city, Focsani because she cannot afford from her eventual salary to pay a baby sitter (the child is in Class 0: between kindergarten and primary school). She is very talented in crafts, handmade knitting and handmade jewelleries but she does find a way to sell them for having a little income for her family. Her husband is working into the black market in Italy and sending some money home. They are not into a insurance system, pension system or health system.
26/41
T. S. (29 years old, woman). She is coming from a family with big social problems (domestic violence, under the poverty level), the father sends his family out of the house, and her mother grew by herself the 2 girls. One is T. S. . Because off financial reasons, she is leaving to the nearest town Focsani and she start to work as warehouse employee into a supermarket. She is decided to go for a better life and she is continued her study becoming medical assistant. Even after this school qualification she cannot find a job - not having a network and either not the resources to pay a bribe (spaga in Romanian). In 2010 she decided to leave Romania together with her husband for Greece and there she is working as cleaning lady and her husband in by hour paid jobs paid. After 1 year, after they saved a bit of money decided to come back in Romania and here, in the country side, in a very small village Fata far away from center of they opened a small shop with all kind of products. In 2012 she is having a baby and they employed another lady as selling lady in the small shop. The shop is doing worst and worst and in 2014 they closed the shop, the husband decided to go to Focsani and work in construction. They moved to Focsani but because they cannot survive with the salary of her husband they all come back to Dumitresti, back to his old family house and live together with their older relatives. Sometimes he is working as fellow worker in construction.
B. C. (26 years, woman). She is born in Dumitresti in a very modest family together with 8 other brothers and sisters. She can finalize only 8 years of school because financial problems force her to go to work. At 18 years she is leaving Romania to Italy, her father is already working here. Here she started to wash dishes into a restaurant. Here she found her love and she married with a Romanian boy, who was working in construction without any legal papers). Until 2009 she is working into that restaurant and in 2010 she started working in a pizzeria. Because both, she and her husband do not have a proper job, proper salaries, they cannot take care of their own expenses and in 2011 they decide to return to Romania, to leave into their family country side house because in this way they do not have to pay any more rent. In 2011 she is having her first baby and they are both employed as paid by hour cleaning employees in the school of Bicestii de Sus, a village in Dumitresti community. In 2014 she is employed half time as cleaning lady. In 2015 she is having the second child, she is taking her maternal leaving,
27/41
which is 2 years in Romania and instead of her, her husband takes the half time job. She is leaving in her husband parents’ house, together with her husband family. Because they live under the poverty threshold (her husband salary is 350 RON=78 EUR), they take also black market jobs.
Most of the people involved in the focus group are starting from very vulnerable situations, even living under the poverty threshold. A small set of capabilities from the starting point seems to end up in vicious circle of going down: • No or less opportunities to study in the home town • Lack of jobs or not having the resources to pay for a job • Looking for a better future in a country abroad, but confronted with abuses and black market jobs • Coming back for family reasons and trying to find a job or opening an own business • In the end living together with other family members to overcome financial issues. Authorities and policy makers don’t seem to succeed in the transformation of potential capabilities into real capabilities and functionings. 5.3.2. Leaving for another country
H. D. left Romania to go to work in Spain and left Spain again due to the crisis and the severe measures towards foreign workers. Spain lifted the labour market restrictions for Romanian migrants in 2009 but effectively re-imposed them in 2011 in response to serious disturbances of the labour market. This measure and employment cuts in Spain have especially affected migrant workers. While the employment of Spanish nationals fell by 14.3% between the second quarter of 2008 and the third quarter of 2012, employment of foreign workers went down by 24.9%.25 In 2011 30% of Romanian workers were unemployed.26 Since 2012 there are more Romanian emigrants from Spain than Romanian immigrants.27 Italy seems to be a preferred country of new destination since Italy lifted the restriction for Romanian workers in 2012. This resulted in an increasing trend of Romanian immigrants in Italy.
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observatories/eurwork/comparative-information/impact-of-the-crisis-on-workingconditions-in-europe 26 http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/287 27 http://www.ine.es/jaxi/menu.do?L=1&type=pcaxis&path=%2Ft20%2Fp307&file=inebase 25
28/41
Figure 14 Romanian migration from and to Spain / Source: National Statistics Spain
Not only Italy became a preferable country, the Northern countries became more popular among Romanian migrants already in a migration process. Job opportunities were perhaps not the first motivation either knowing some friends or relatives in the new host country who went relative well through the crisis. In Belgium for example Romanian migrants are the fastest growing group of migrants since the last decade: in comparison to 2005 in 2015 13 times more Romanians are living in Belgium.28 Table 5 Main nationalities of foreign population in Belgium Source: National Statistics Belgium 2005 2015 Country Amount % Ranking Amount % France 117.349 13.5 2 159.352 Italy 179.015 20.6 1 156.977 Netherlands 104.978 12.1 3 149.199 Morocco 81.287 9,3 4 82.009 Poland 14.251 1.7 11 68.403 Romania 5.632 0.6 16 65.768 Spain 43.203 5.0 5 60.386 Portugal 27.374 3.1 8 42.793 Germany 36.330 4.2 7 39.294 Turkey 40.403 4.6 6 36.747 Others 220.770 25.4 394.358 Total 870.862 100.0 1.255.286
Ranking 12.7 12.5 11.9 6.5 5.4 5.2 4.8 3.4 3.1 2.9 31.4 100.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Before the crisis, Belgium was not that popular for Romanians. The financial crisis was an important turning point in the Romanian migration to Belgium. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s difficult to say if the newcomers are first host country migrants or migrants already in a migration process. More research is needed to understand this pattern.
Data based on Algemene Directie Statistiek â&#x20AC;&#x201C; FOD Economie en Kerncijfers 2015: http://statbel.fgov.be/nl/binaries/NL_kerncijfers_2015_WEB_COMPLET_tcm325-275721.pdf 28
29/41
Figure 15 Number of Romanian in Belgium 199-2015 / Source: National Statistics Belgium
5.4. Syndrome Italy or the deterioration of personal capabilities
Syndrome Italy a concept used in the psychiatric hospital of Iasi (North East Romania) is referring to the phenomenon of depressed women after returning from Italy. Romanian women migrated to Italy are mainly employed in homes as cleaners and caregivers for the elderly as well as in nursing. Before the crisis host families did have enough resources to pay for more than 1 caregiver. The crisis caused a cut in family budget and less money is available for external caregivers. F. C., a psychologist at the psychiatric hospital in Iasi (Skype interview January 20 2016) gave an example of 35 year old lady who returned from Italy: “In the first years – the years before the crisis she and another lady worked for a host family. Together they could take care of the household, the working hours and payments were reasonable. After the crisis her colleague could not stay anymore because of cuts in budgets. At that time the grandfather of the family got dementia. This resulted in less free time even worse in a 24/7 availability for the 80 year old man. During the night she has to wake up because the man needed care. After a period of almost no sleep and hard work, the lady returned back to Romania suffering depression due to the emotional and psychological pressure she experienced in Italy.”. 5.5. Impact of migration on community services
According to data provided by the College of Physicians of Romania, in 1989 Romania had 56.000 physicians with the right to practice, in 2014 their number is 39.000.29 The medical brain drain has intensified after Romania’s accession to the European Union. Since 2007, around 15.000 Romanian medics have migrated for work abroad. This intensification was strengthened by the anti-crisis measures: around 80% of doctors are working in the public sector and as a consequence were also affected by the cut in salaries in 2010.
http://www.cmr.ro/comunicat-de-presa-34/ http://www.cmr.ro/migratia-medicilor/ http://www.cmr.ro/migratia-medicilor-2012/ FERARU, Petronela Daniela, Romania and the Crisis in the Health System. Migration of Doctors, In: Global Journal of Medical Research, 2013, 25, XIII, p. 25-32. 29
30/41
Figure 16 Evolution of leaving Romanian doctors / Source: Colegiului Medicilor din România
The data of leaving Romanian doctors show a big regional difference. The biggest departure can be seen from academic centers from Bucharest, Cluj and Iasi. The most popular destinations in 2011 were: the UK (900), France (500), Germany (400) and Belgium (80). Although the migration trend of Romanian doctors was already visible in the years before the crisis, the financial difficulties and the taken measures have fastened the emigration of physicians. The spread of this trend can be seen in all medical domains: in 2014 424 of 2.450 of leaving doctors were family doctors or 1/5 of the leaving doctors and in hospitals 13.521 doctors are registered in 2014 while in 2011 this number was 20.648. Migrating doctors have a young profile and the ageing of remaining doctors starts to cause problems. One of the side effects is an immigration trend of doctors from the Republic of Moldova.30 It is worrisome that Romania is actually facing a shortage of health care staff: in 2014 3.000 doctors entered while 3.500 were exiting the system (migration, pension, decease). An estimation done in March 2015 calculated that there are around 550 doctors, mainly in rural area, too few in Romania.31 This number is confirmed by the EHCI index 2014.32 In the same line are the results of the study ‘Building primary care in a changing Europe’ and gives an insight in the gap between urban and rural areas in Romania. In urban areas the density of family physicians is 1 family physician per 1000 population and in rural areas the density is 1 family physician per 2500–3000 population.33 As the issue of scarce resources is prevailing, policies seem to be inefficient in order to stop, or at least slower down the medical brain drain. 5.6. Impact of migration on family structures 5.6.1 Children – social orphans
Emigration became a destabilizing factor for the family especially when children are left in Romania and brought changes with regards to the functions of the family. Children often find themselves responsible for tasks usually completed by the adult members of the family (such as housework and even agricultural work in the case of children from rural areas), leaving aside their obligations to attend school. According to official statistics, over 80.000 children living in Romania have at least one parent working abroad. However, numerous NGO’s in Romania argue that the actual size of this phenomenon is still unknown, despite the fact that efforts are made by the public authorities to determine the real number of children living in this country and having at least one parent who works abroad. The biggest concern is that of children who remain in their home country completely deprived of parental care. In literature the term ‘home alone generation’ or ‘left behind children’ are used. According to UNICEF-Alternative Social World Health Organization, Health workers originating from the Republic of Moldova who live and work in Romania, Republic of Moldova Health Policy Paper Series No. 13, 2014, 90 p. 31 http://www.digi24.ro/Stiri/Digi24/Actualitate/Sanatate/Prea+putini+medici+de+familie 32 EHCI Index 2014, p. 68. 33 Building primary care in a changing Europe – Case studies, p. 227. 30
31/41
Association (AAS) (data 2008) estimates, Romania has some 350.000 so-called children left behind. The number of left behind minors amounts to 7% of the total Romanian population between the ages of 0 and 18 years. 157.000 children have only fathers working abroad, while 67.000 have only mothers working abroad. More than one third, however, or some 126.000 children, have been deprived of both parents. Some 400.000 children have experienced that particular form of solitude for at least part of their lives. In other words, out of a total of 5 million Romanian children, some 750.000 of them have been affected to a greater or lesser extent by the departure of their parents. 52% of these so-called children left behind, in other words 180.000 children, live in rural areas where it is more common for mothers to go away, unlike in the larger cities where it is more common for fathers to leave. Half of the left behind children are younger than 10 years of age. Of these, more than half are between 2 and 6 years of age and 4% of them are less than one year old. 16% of these children have spent more than one year of their young lives far away from their parents. Indeed, 3% of them have been left for more than four years. This has an impact on the mental well-being of children: being bullied, being in conflict, depression, being ill and even suicide is more present in the group of children left behind. They cannot offer them the psychological family balance of their biological parents. Furthermore, they often drop out of school, thus the level of illiteracy and/or under-education has become alarming in the contemporary Romanian society. The counties with the highest percentages of children having at least one parent working abroad were mainly from the NordEast development region. This is also the region with the highest poverty rate and the highest risk of social exclusion in Romania. 5.6.2. Orphaned elderly people
The lack of care is also felt by the elderly who remain in Romania, often having to take up the parents’ responsibilities. Care-giving for these persons is even harder to find than it is for the minors who are left at home by migrating parents. Few women in Romania are willing to offer care-giving services given the possibility of performing the same job abroad, for a higher wage. Consequently, if we consider that Romania is undergoing more or less the same demographic trends as Italy, that is, an ageing population in need of care and low birth-rates, combined with a welfare system which is not prepared to offer adequate assistance. To conclude this paragraph, the report refers cites James Bluemel, director of Channel 4's three-part series ‘The Romanians Are Coming’: “The fundamental right to free movement for EU citizens is important, correct and valuable, but let’s not be blasé. Leaving your family and friends behind as you move 2,000 miles across Europe in the hope of finding a job is not a decision that anyone takes lightly. It’s a scary and painful thing to do. It rips families apart and it destroys communities. It is not something that should have to happen. For many of the Romanians I met, the phrase "freedom to move" is contradictory, as where is the freedom in having no choice but to leave your country to search for work? It’s important and correct that we have that right to free movement, but let’s not confuse the life of a migrant worker with freedom.”.34
34
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/02/many-romanian-migrants-phrase-freedom-move-contradictory
32/41
6. Conclusion: towards entangled capabilities 6.1. Entangling capabilities
Previously data have demonstrated that earning more money abroad and having more job opportunities are important factors to emigrate. Calculations (September 2015) show that a Romanian employee will reach a salary of a German one in at least 30 years from now.35 Currently, a company spends in Romania, with each employee, 4.6 euro for each hour worked by him, while in Germany the average labour cost is 31.4 euro per hour. Romania is the second lowest in the European Union regarding the hourly labour cost, last being Bulgaria, at a cost of 3.8 euro per hour, as the Eurostat data show. The average in the European Union is 24.6 euro per hour. So it seems that the coming decades Romania will be still confronted with emigration. Some calculations show that in between this and 20-25 years the Romanian population will further decrease to a number of 15 million people. Romania is in other words representing one of the biggest mobile groups in Europe. A trend that seems to be stimulated by the European Union: putting a strong stress on labour mobility in the latest 2014-2020 strategy. The Commission has put forward seven flagship initiatives to catalyze progress under each priority theme. Flagship 6 ‘an agenda for new skills and jobs’ mentions the following goal: facilitate and promote intra-EU labour mobility and better match labour supply with demand. Comparable with discussions concerning economic growth and financial austerity, mobility is perceived more as an economical must rather than an opportunity to personal development. This focus on individual economic ‘well-being’ causes conflicts with other internal capabilities and community demands for a sustainable development. The freedom to move as fundamental human right is narrowed to almost a moral duty and shifts away from being an instrument to a goal as such. Martha Nussbaum's well-known list, which contains prescribed capabilities that are grouped together under 10 central human capabilities (life, bodily health, bodily integrity, senses, imagination and thought, emotions, practical reason, affiliation, other species, play and control over one's environment) provides a grip to visualize the side and negative effects of emigration. The financial crisis of 2008-2009 strengthened these negative effects. These conflicting capabilities raises one of the major points of debate in the capability literature: which capabilities should be selected as relevant and who should decide or how a decision should be made on the (e)valuation of the various capabilities and functionings into an overall assessment. Literature has been somewhat vague in responding to the question of how to select and weight capabilities: it has been argued that each individual or group should itself select, weight, trade off, and sequence or otherwise entangle capabilities as well as prioritize them in relation to other normative considerations. In the case of a Romanian family living in a society without job potentials, decent earning and social provisions, will have to choose for one of the following functionings: to find a job and a decent income requires parents to migrate, which will generate the income needed to properly feed themselves and the family or to care for the children at home and give them all the attention, care and supervision they need. From a purely theoretical point of view both opportunities are opportunities open to the parents, but they are not both together open. The point about the capability approach is precisely to create a comprehensive or holistic approach, and ask which sets of capabilities are open, that is: can simultaneously provide for my family and properly care for and supervise children? Or are parents rather forced to make some hard, perhaps even tragic choices between two functionings which both reflect basic needs and basic moral duties? Enhancing and using one capability, in this case migration (control over one's environment) in a narrowed one way direction, can indeed put a pressure on your own and other ones capabilities, even reduce them. Conflicting capabilities are causing challenges to public and private authorities to find a balance between fundamental rights and the practical implementation of the 35
http://www.smartree.com/en/zf-romania-vs-eu-when-would-get-romanian-employees-similar-salaries-with-germans/
33/41
improvement of capabilities. Improving one capability needs to be covered by an impact measurement, positive and negative. Side effects can be minimalized through framework policies so that in the end people have a freedom to choice for migration. In the context of this report, the idea of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;entangledâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; capabilities is introduced, as an overall concept of weighted, aggregated, combined and connected capabilities. Entangled capabilities can be defined as capabilities plus the external conditions that make the exercise of a function a free option. The aim of public policy is the promotion of entangled capabilities. 6.2. Entangled capabilities promoted by the home country Romania
Until now Romania has adopted 4 strategies on migration. The first one was adopted in 2004: the main objectives were to ensure the free movement of the EU citizens. The 2nd strategy of 2007 wanted to attract foreign labour force for covering the workforce deficits. Through this strategy Romania tried to cover the brain drain. Due to the crisis, the 3rd strategy had a restrictive approach towards immigration. The latest strategy has been adopted by Romania in September 2015 and wants to facilitate the entry of immigrants in order to cover workforce deficits. Romanian emigration policies is fragmented. The Romanian policy measures to promote circular migration (temporary and usually repetitive movement of a migrant worker) were not very effective, although some positive examples can be mentioned. Romania. Steps to promote a system of managed migration or forms of periodic and circular migration are taken. There were taken steps to promote a managed migration system or forms of periodic and circular migration. In the EU pre-accession period, Romania signed bilateral agreements regulating the migration of labour force with several countries. In 2002, the Labour Force Migration Office, an authority in charge with both the recruitment and mediation of Romanian labour force, was set up. This office initiated bilateral contracts with relevant state agencies from receiving countries or private. From 2006 the Romanian authorities started to offer primarily cultural assistance to Romanian emigrant communities via a special structure of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs responsible for the Romanian Diaspora, the Department for Romanians Living Abroad. The 2008-2010 Action Plan concerning the return of Romanian citizens working abroad was adopted. Jobs fairs were organized in Spain and Italy with the main goal of attracting Romanian migrants back home and informing them about their rights to social security on returning to Romania. The number of participants was rather low and the outcomes were far from what was expected. Other measures such as a bonus of 500 euro to set up a business in Romania and a reduction in VAT, didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t had the expected results. Recently the Repatriate campaign started to attract Romanian entrepreneurs working abroad (http://repatriot.ro/). Also attempts to win back or to keep doctors in Romania (brain gain) were undertaken: in 2012 the Romanian government agreed to open 3.000 new positions but was immediately slowed down by austerity measures. An in October 2015 the salaries of doctors increased. Finally Romania negotiated funding through the European Social Fund and Regional Development program for returners. Besides supporting systems some restrictive measures to control out-migration were taken. By Romanian law, all parents who go to work abroad, either to search for jobs, or with a job already in place, have to notify the social assistance system, and let the authorities know who takes care of their children while they are away. This has to be done at least 40 days before leaving. The law recently changed (September 2013), as in the past, only those who left with a work contract in place had to comply with this regulation. Now it covers all parents, including those going to search for jobs, or those who end up working on the black market abroad. The law includes a fine of 500 to 1.000 Romanian lei for parents who do not inform authorities that they are leaving to work. The law also requires for local authorities to organize social assistance services, to provide counselling for six months for those who become guardians of the children whose parents work abroad. The court can decide to delegate the parental responsibilities, while the parents are away, but for no longer than a year. Romanian authorities included children affected by migration in the category of vulnerable children within the National Strategy for the Protection and Promotion of Child Rights 2014-2020, motivating that these 34/41
children have low school performance and are at high risk of dropping out of school. A pilot program signed in 2013 by the Labour Ministry and the Association of Romanian Women in Italy, together with the Milan city hall, allows children in the counties of Dolj, Gorj, Neamţ, Satu Mare and Suceava to stay in touch with their parents who work in Italy via Internet and Skype at their local libraries. 6.3. Entangled capabilities promoted by host countries
As mentioned before, when Romanian entered the EU in 2007 most EU member states made use of the possibility to temporarily restrict the new EU citizens’ access to their labour markets and welfare systems for up to seven years. Since 2014 these restrictions are lifted, but formed the base for an intense public debate in several countries with arguments for the prolongation of access restrictions. The UK, German, Dutch, and Austrian governments called on the European Commission to strengthen rules to protect the welfare states against being abused by migrants. However there is no evidence of widespread abuse of welfare systems by eastern European migrants. On the contrary public finances in the richer EU15 countries appear to have gained from their eastern European post-enlargement immigration, even when no access restrictions have been in place. A UK study of 2010 found that public-sector revenues from the migrants were at least 1.21 times as large as the costs in each of the fiscal years studied. These positive results were mainly due to migrants receiving substantially less in welfare benefits compared with natives, and to very few of the migrants being old. These two positive effects more than balance the negative effect of migrants earning less income and hence paying less in taxes on average compared with natives. UK figures show that 37.000 citizens from Romania and Bulgaria migrated to the UK in the year 2014, accounting for 6% of total immigration. And 27.000 of those came primarily to work. The question remains if this group of migrants is directly coming from the home country or are these arriving persons already in migration from another country, affected by the crisis such as Spain, Portugal and Ireland. The rise of the numbers can also be explained by the fact that migrants already residing in the host country, now had the opportunity to regulate irregular work. Although this growth does have an impact on the growing number of migrants from Romania, a London School of Economics study released that there was no evidence of an overall negative impact of immigration on jobs, wages, housing or the crowding out of public services.36 Mobile EU workers are on average younger than the population of the host countries, which can represent a welcome demographic boost to the host countries in case these young people settle there. Among the working age population, EU mobile citizens also have a higher activity rate than nationals (77% versus 72%) and are employed at a significantly higher rate (68%) than nationals of the host countries (65%) or third country nationals (53%).37 The fear and the public perception of being threatened, is one of the major challenges for policymakers. Recognizing the added value of Romanian mobility workers needs to go hand in hand with social investment measures: • Concerns often arise about so-called ‘social dumping’, i.e. undercutting of wages and employment standards by mobile workers. These relate in particular to the working conditions of mobile EU workers and to insufficient enforcement of labour law by national authorities in the destination countries. Mobile EU workers can be subject to abuse and exploitation, for instance when they get trapped in undeclared work or when rules on the posting of workers are not respected. Member States' enforcement authorities, especially labour inspectorates, therefore have a key role to play in order to enforce applicable conditions and terms of employment. Enhanced EU cooperation can help tackle various irregular situations of mobile EU workers as well. • On the national and European level directives and guideline are needed to equalize the access to the labour market and social protection: this means the concrete implementation of the principle of the same access to social protection as others in the country where they are living and working. 36 37
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/ea019.pdf Eurostat: Labour Force Survey
35/41
•
Further on the implementation of the new Enforcement Directive (May 2016) to increase the protection of workers temporarily posted abroad and enhance legal certainty. At local level, inflows of mobile EU citizens may result in additional pressure on public services such as healthcare, housing, education or transport, especially when such services need to respond to a larger population over a relatively short period. The development of strategies is to invest in the provision of relevant public services, which would of course benefit the native population as well.
6.4. First steps towards social investments
Although social investment proposal will be more explored in the next stage of the project, some first steps towards social investment are proposed. These can be seen as a starting point for further discussion and exploration: • improvement of the information base concerning Romanian migrants who work abroad. This connected to in depth research about actual migration patterns and motives of Romanian migrants according to the effects of the crisis on migration. • promoting circular migration • protecting Romanian diaspora rights • encouraging return migration through a range of facilities for migrants and their families, such as: o consultancy and assistance for entrepreneurship start-up schemes (including assistance in accessing the European Social Fund), o participation in training programs, o job search support for the spouse of the migrant, o psychological counselling for the children, o recognition of professional certificates and/or informal competencies acquired abroad. • taking into account the different needs and profiles of returners (failed, conservative and innovative returners). • finding ways that remittances are invested in businesses, especially in the rural areas, by facilitating the access to credits for micro enterprises. • finding ways to respond to the needs of transnational families and parenting in order to protect the rights of relatives left at home and to develop appropriate tools enabling remote parenting and supporting transnational parent–school communication. A first step can be the recognition of new family realities: o transnational families as families whose members live some or most of the time separated from each other, yet hold together and create something that can be seen as a feeling of collective welfare and unity, namely family hood, even across national borders” o transnational parenting as adults’ parenting from a different country than the one in which their children reside. As already mentioned this will be the subject for the next work package, in which the main attention will go to early child care and elderly care.
36/41
Appendix 1 - Bibliography 1. Crisis related literature BUREAN, Tom; BADESCU, Gabriel, The effects of the economic crisis and austerity measures on political culture in Romania, Cluj, 2013, 20 p. CARITAS EUROPE, Crisis monitoring report 2014. The European crisis and its human cost, a call for fair alternatives and solutions, 2014, 116 p (Romania: p 56- ). European Semester documents FLESHER, Alina; CRIVEANU, Radu Catalin, Some consequences of the economic crisis in Romania, In: Annals of the university of Petrosani, Economics, 12, 2, 2012, p. 135-142. GOSCHIN, Zizi; CONSTANTIN, Daniela-Luminita; DANCIU, Aniela-Raluca, A regional perspective on the impact of he current economic crisis in Romania, In: Romanian economic and business review, 5, 3, p. 204-225. MARCUTA, Liviu; MARCUTA, Alina; ANGELESCU, Carmen, Effects of the economic crisis on the standard of living in Romania, In: Procedia Economics and Finance, 6, 2013, p 89-95. POP, Luana, ESPN Thematic report on social investment Romania, 2015, 33 p. STOICIU, Victoria, Austerity and structural reforms in Romania severe measures, questionable economic results and negative social consequences, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, 2012, 9 p.
2. Migration related literature Access to rights and civil dialogue for all, Final report: Romanian immigrants in Spain, 2011, 11 p. ADUMITROAIE, Elena, Perception of parental rejection in children left behind by migrant parents, In: Revista de cercetare si interventie sociala, 2013, 42, p. 191-203. ALEXE, Iris, Social impact of emigration and rural-urban migration in central and eastern Europe. Final Country Report Romania, European Commission, 2012, 41 p. AMBROSINI, J. William, The selection of migrants and returnees: evidence from Romania and implications, 2011, 44 p. http://www.nber.org/papers/w16912.pdf ANDREN, Daniela; ROMAN Monica, Should I Stay or Should I Go? Romanian Migrants during Transition and Enlargements, Discussion Paper, 2014, 34 p. http://ftp.iza.org/dp8690.pdf ANDRIONI, Felicia, The socio-economic effects of Romanian parents’ migration on their children’s destiny, In: Annals of the University of Petroşani, Economics, 2011, 11, 4, p. 5-12.
37/41
BERNAT, J. S. and VIRUELA, R., The economic crisis and immigration: Romanian citizens in the ceramic tile district of Castelló (Spain), In: Journal of Urban & Regional Analysis, 2011, 3(1), p. 45–65. www.jurareview.ro/2011_1_1/a_2011_1_1_4_bernat.pdf BOHME, Marcus, Alone but better off? Adult child migration and health of elderly parents in Moldova, In: Journal of health economics, 2014, 17 p. BUNEA, Daniela, Cross county internal migration and convergence in Romania, In: Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 2011,13(2) , p. 508-521. http://www.oeconomica.uab.ro/upload/lucrari/1320112/32.pdf BUNEA, Daniela, Modern Gravity Models of Internal Migration. The Case of Romania, In: Theoretical and Applied Economics, Volume XIX (2012), No. 4(569), p. 127-144. http://store.ectap.ro/articole/714.pdf CEHAN, Irina, Migration of health personnel: source of inequalities in health in Romania, In: Postmodern Openings, 2012, 3, 4, p. 109-120. http://postmodernopenings.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/8-Migration-of-Health.pdf CIOBANU, Ruxandra Oana, A Stage Approach to Transnational Migration. Migrant Narratives from Rural Romania, PhD Thesis, Osnabruck, 2010, 231 p. CROITORU, Alin; SANDU, Dumitru; TUDOR, Elena, The Europeanisation of Everyday Life: CrossBorder Practices and Transnational Identifications Among EU and Third-Country Citizens. Romanians’ Social Transnationalism in the Making, EUCROSS Working Paper 8, March 2014, 62 p. CUCURUZAN, Romana Cramarenco, ‘The Romanian circulatory labour migration to Italy – Out of necessity or out of choice?’, In: Studia Universitatis Babeş‐Bolyai, Studia Europaea, 55.4, 2010, 4, pp. 71– 85. http://search.proquest.com/openview/d5f85e93ab2e516dc5156e86b5bc6849/1?pq-origsite=gscholar Eurofond, Labour mobility within the EU: The impact of return migration, 2012, 80 p. http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/sites/default/files/ef_publication/field_ef_document/ef1243en.pdf FERARU, Petronela Daniela, Romania and the Crisis in the Health System. Migration of Doctors, In: Global Journal of Medical Research, 2013, 25, XIII, p. 25-32. https://globaljournals.org/GJMR_Volume13/4-Romania-and-the-Crisis-in.pdf FERRI, A., Survey of European Union and return migration policies: the case of Romanian migrants, Veneto Levoro, Mestre, 2010 64 p. GOSCHIN, Z. & ROMAN, M., Romanian migration and remittances in an economic crisis context, 2014, Editura ASE, Colecţia Statistică şi econometrie, GULEI, Alexandru-Stelian, Remigration, identity and adjustment, In: Symposion, 2014, 1, 2, p. 177-189 HINKS, Tim; DAVIES, Simon, Intentions to Return Evidence from Romanian Migrants. Policy Research Working Paper 7166, World Bank Group, 2015, 30 p.
38/41
http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2015/01/20/000158349_2015012 0153357/Rendered/PDF/WPS7166.pdf IVAN, Paul, The Economic Effects of migration. A Romanian overview, In: Ecoforum, 2015, 4, 1, p. 160-164. LAZAR, Andreea, Transnational migration studies. Reframing sociological imagination and research, In: Journal of comparative research in anthropology and sociology, 2, 2, 2011, p.69-83. LUCA, Catalin, The remigration of Romanian children 2008-2012, Iasi, 2013, 164 p. MARA, Isilda; LANDESMANN, Michael, Do I stay because I am happy or am I happy because I stay? Life satisfaction in migration, and the decision to stay permanently, return and out-migrate, Discussion Paper, 2013, 43 p. www.norface-migration.org/publ_uploads/NDP_08_13.pdf MARAN, Petru Daniel, The Impact of the Economic Crisis on the Romanian Communities from the Province of Ciudad Real, Spain. The Case of Villarrubia de los Ojos, In: Journal of Settlements and Spatial Planning, vol. 3, no. 2, 2012, p. 141-149. http://geografie.ubbcluj.ro/ccau/jssp/arhiva_2_2012/10JSSP022012.pdf MARCU, Silvia, Romanian Migration to the Community of Madrid (Spain): Patterns of Mobility and Return, In: International Journal of Population Research, Volume 2011, 13 pages. http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijpr/2011/258646/ MARTINEZ, Rafael Viruela, The Romanian Migrants in Spain. An Exceptional Migratory Flow, In: International Review of Social Research, 1, 2011, p. 31-59. http://www.ceeol.com/aspx/issuedetails.aspx?issueid=53a108c4-96c3-42e5-be6acac4d8f72773&articleId=dd28bdb3-8667-4115-9335-77bac5cc1e3c MATICHESCU, Marius Lupsa, The Romanian migration: development of the phenomenon and the part played by the immigration policies of European countries, In: Revista de cercetare si interventie sociala, 2015, 50, p. 225-238. OECD, Romania – Country Notes: recent changes in migration movement and policies, 2012, 2 p. http://www.oecd.org/countries/romania/ PADURARU, Monica Elisabeta, Romania – Emigration’s impact on families and children, In: Journal of community positive practices, 2014, XIV (1), p. 27-36. PRADA, Elena-Maria, A regional analysis of Romanian migration determinants, In: Statistika, 2015, 95, 3, p. 39-47. PRADA, Elena-Maria, An investigation of Romanians’ return intentions from Spain, In: Revista Română de Statistică, Supliment nr. 5/2015, p. 31-42. http://www.revistadestatistica.ro/supliment/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/RRSS05_2015_A02_en.pdf
39/41
ROMAN, Monica; GOSCHIN, Zizi, Return migration in an economic crisis context. A survey on Romanian healthcare professionals, 2014, 21 p. http://www.revecon.ro/articles/2014-2/2014-2-7.pdf ROMAN, Monica; VOICU Cristina, Some Socio-Economic Effects of Labour Migration on the Sending Country. Evidence from Romania, 2010, 17 p. http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/23527/1/MPRA_paper_23527.pdf ROSU, Paula, To return or not to return? The impact of the economic crisis on migrants and their return rate, Lund University, 2012, 55 p. http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&recordOId=3046939&fileOId=3046941 SANDU, Dimitru, Emerging transnational migration from Romanian villages, Research paper, 2002, 43 p. SANDU, Dumitru; RADU, Cosmin; CONSTANTINESCU, Monica; CIOBANU, Oana, A Country Report on Romanian Migration Abroad: Stocks and Flows After 1989, Multicultural Center Prague, 2004, 35 p. SERBAN, Monica, Migration policies from origin perspective in the case of Romania. Testing a definition, In: Journal of community positive practices, XV, 1, 2015, p. 72-93. STAN, Sabina, Explaining Romanian labour migration: from development gaps to development trajectories, In: Labour History, 2014, 55, 1, p. 21-46. SANDULEASA, Bertha, Effects of Parental Migration on Families and Children in Post-Communist Romania, In: RSP, 2015, 46, p. 196-207. http://cis01.central.ucv.ro/revistadestiintepolitice/files/numarul46_2015/18.%20Effects%20of%20Pare ntal%20Migration%20on%20Families%20and%20Children...%20pp.%20196-207.pdf STANCULESCU, Manuela Sofia; STOICU, Victoria, The impact of the economic crisis on the labour migration from Romania, Frierich Ebert Stiftung, 2012, 202 p. http://www.researchgate.net/publication/268221009_THE_IMPACT_OF_THE_ECONOMIC_CRISI S_ON_THE_LABOUR_MIGRATION_FROM_ROMANIA In Romanian: http://www.fes.ro/media/images/publications/Impactul_crizei.pdf STELIAC, Nela, The Romanian migration between official and unofficial, In: International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2014, 5, 6 (1), p. 227-238. SUCIU, Oana-Valentina Suciu, Migration and demographic trends in Romania: A brief historical outlook, Conference paper CRCE 2010, 32 p. http://www.crce.org.uk/publications/demographics/part2.pdf TOADER, Elena, Current Opinions of Doctors and Decisional Factors on the Migration of the Romanian Physicians: A Study of Several Mass-Media Statements, In: Revista de cercetare si interventie sociala, 2012, 37, pp. 144-161. TOMSA, Raluca, Children left behind in Romania, anxiety and predictor variables, In: Psychological reports, 2015, 116, 2, p. 458-512.
40/41
United Nations, Population Division, https://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/DataQuery/ VASILCU, Despina, The migration of health care skills in the context of the enlargement of the economic European area â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the case of the Romanian doctors, In: The Annals of The "Ĺ&#x17E;tefan cel Mare" University of Suceava. Fascicle of The Faculty of Economics and Public Administration, Vol. 10, Special Number, 2010, p. 83-91. http://www.annals.seap.usv.ro/index.php/annals/article/view/324/333 VIANELLO Francesca Alice, International migrations and care provisions for elderly people left behind. The cases of the Republic of Moldova and Romania, In: European Journal of Social Work, 2015, 9 p. World Health Organization, Health workers originating from the Republic of Moldova who live and work in Romania, Republic of Moldova Health Policy Paper Series No. 13, 2014, 90 p. ZAMFIR, Ana-Maria, Profile of Romanian returned migrants, In: Practical Application of Science, Volume II, Issue 4 (6), 2014, p. 99-105. http://www.sea.bxb.ro/Article/SEA_6_15.pdf
3. Newspapers: Romanian Immigrants 'Not Interested' In Returning Home http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/romanian-migrants-not-interested-to-get-back-home Thousands exit Germany for Bulgaria and Romania http://www.thelocal.de/20140224/thousands-bulgarians-and-romanias-leave-germany-each-month La Roumanie, nouvelle terre d'immigration http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2009/07/13/la-roumanie-nouvelle-terre-dimmigration_1218239_3214.html
41/41
RE-InVEST - Rebuilding an Inclusive, Value-based Europe of Solidarity and Trust through Social Investments In 2013, as a response to rising inequalities, poverty and distrust in the EU, the Commission launched a major endeavour to rebalance economic and social policies with the Social Investment Package (SIP). RE‐InVEST aims to strengthen the philosophical, institutional and empirical underpinnings of the SIP, based on social investment in human rights and capabilities. Our consortium is embedded in the ‘Alliances to Fight Poverty’. We will actively involve European citizens severely affected by the crisis in the co‐construction of a more powerful and effective social investment agenda with policy recommendations.
http://www.re-invest.eu/
Co-ordinators Ides Nicaise (HIVA‐KU Leuven), general project co‐ordinator/scientific co‐ordinator Michel Debruyne (Beweging vzw), network co‐ordinator
Partners HIVA‐KU Leuven • HIVA‐Research Institute for Work and Society, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven • Belgium CNRS • Center National de la Recherche Scientifique • France SOFI • Soziologisches Forschungsinstitut Goettingen e.V. • Germany IFZ • Internationales Forschungszentrum für Soziale und Ethische Fragen • Austria UCL • Université Catholique de Louvain • Belgium NUIM • National University of Ireland Maynooth • Ireland Loughborough University • United Kingdom EUR • Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam • the Netherlands TU Delft •Technische Universiteit Delft • the Netherlands Liverpool Hope University • United Kingdom IRD • Institut de Recherche pour le Développement • France OSE • Observatoire Social Européen asbl • Belgium UNIGE • Université de Génève • Switzerland RSU • Rigas Stradina Universitate • Latvia Beweging vzw • Belgium EAPN Portugal •Rede Europeia Anti Pobreza Portugal Associacao • Portugal Fundatia TON • Fundatia the Open Network for Community Development • Romania The Poverty Alliance • United Kingdom CNCA • Coordinamento Nazionale Comunita di Accoglienza Associazione • Italy
42/41